Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 28 Jan 2013 21:58

krishnan wrote:what are those 2 platforms , they seems to be very close to the launch

are you hinting at the underwater pontoon and the platform is being dragged at a predetermined speed by the vessel to the left in the pic?

member_23694 · Post by **member_23694** » 28 Jan 2013 22:10

Singha wrote: my favourite launch video is the silo launch of black painted SS-18 satan
its like a big 200t PSLV sized dog with the meat and attitude to tear apart half a country on its own.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUM3cyUPlJ8

surprisingly when the SS 18 is launched as the Dnepr rocket it still seems to be launched from a silo

watch this one for launch from a very harsh environment
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBPg_crn1Rw

compilation of Russian ICBM launches
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Vdzz9hco8o
watch the SS 24 at 1:30

by next year we will have similar compilation for Agni 5, K 4 and K 15

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 28 Jan 2013 22:12

Vina, No fins or vanes on the booster. However guidance has to be turned on atleast a few minutes (~2mins) before launch.
Yes the idea of three pack launch tubes or one K-4 gives great flexiblity.

Calling Arihant a jugaad is an insult. Its a weapon system develeoped after long years of careful studies.

marimuthu, Thanks for reposting the A-I video.

Arun_S had always stated the full range of B-05/K-15 and Shourya as ~1700km.

SS, The cold launch of K-4 to check out the gas generator would be with a full weight dummy vehicle.
Also K-4 was pad/land tested once.

An Arihant with mixed load of six B-05s and two K-4 lounging in South Indian ocean will make the world very peaceful.

kvraghavaiah · Post by **kvraghavaiah** » 28 Jan 2013 22:17

Many guys are thinking that the submarine keeps moving for ever and the missile has to be launched in move.

But, I think that is not how a SLBM is launched. Submarine will stop moving for a little while and the misslie will be launched. Ofcourse, the missile should have ability to withstand minor drags.

srin · Post by **srin** » 28 Jan 2013 22:19

Singha wrote:my favourite launch video is the silo launch of black painted SS-18 satan
its like a big 200t PSLV sized dog with the meat and attitude to tear apart half a country on its own.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUM3cyUPlJ8

Wow - one thing different is there is no dense white smoke, only faint black trail.

I vaguely remember Astra also is supposed to have smokeless propellant, but don't know if, for an ICBM like the Satan, it confers benefit against boost phase detection ?

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 28 Jan 2013 22:24

krishnan wrote:what are those 2 platforms , they seems to be very close to the launch

The surface platform seems to have a spindle for cabling.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 28 Jan 2013 22:32

srin wrote:
Singha wrote:my favourite launch video is the silo launch of black painted SS-18 satan
its like a big 200t PSLV sized dog with the meat and attitude to tear apart half a country on its own.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUM3cyUPlJ8
Wow - one thing different is there is no dense white smoke, only faint black trail.

I vaguely remember Astra also is supposed to have smokeless propellant, but don't know if, for an ICBM like the Satan, it confers benefit against boost phase detection ?

SS18 and Sineva missiles use liquid propellant (N2O4/UDMH). Solid fuel missiles like the Bulava and Topol have dense trail. Note that India has liquid fuel technology also. It uses N2O4/UDMH engines in the PSLV.

vasu raya · Post by **vasu raya** » 28 Jan 2013 22:51

Ramana ji, perhaps the guidance is enabled as part of the launch countdown

there is seamless booster ignition right after clearing the surface that doesn't seem to give too much safety margin if the sea state is rough, usually we notice the less than a second lag before the first stage fires in other SLBM launches as other posters have stated.

Also, the trajectory didn't go flat at 20km altitude, maybe this test was with vanilla ballistic flight path for a range of 1500km.

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 28 Jan 2013 23:04

Shourya seems to have always been launched from that funny box thing. Not sure if it meant to be a land variant at all. Maybe Agnis take care of land launches.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 28 Jan 2013 23:37

dinesha, Can you go frame-by-frame and figure out the height above sealevel when the booster ignites and the precise time?

Looks like around 3 secs? Cap gets ejected soon after (~5 sec).

Awesome. So the vehicle ignites the booster once its a safe height above sea level. Note its a straight up flight and no coning manouver to avoid fallback fratricide.

hnair · Post by **hnair** » 28 Jan 2013 23:44

From the wiki, a comparision with the first two versions of Polaris

B05
Weight 15,000 lbs (6000 kg)
Height 33 ft (10 m)
Diameter 2.4 ft (0.74 m)
Range: ~1055 nautical miles (1,900 km)

Polaris A3
Weight 35,700 lb (16,200 kg)
Height 32 ft 4 in (9.86 m)
Diameter 4 ft 6 in (1.37 m)
Range: 2,500 nautical miles (4,600 km)

Polaris A1
Weight 28,800 lbs (13,090 kg)
Height 28.5 ft (8.69 m)
Diameter 4ft 6 in (1.37 m)
Range: 1000 nautical miles (1853 km)

Slender little package in a lightweight missile. Great show

(corrected for NMi vs Mi

)

Sagar G · Post by **Sagar G** » 28 Jan 2013 23:48

ramana wrote:dinesha, Can you go frame-by-frame and figure out the height above sealevel when the booster ignites and the precise time?

Looks like around 3 secs? Cap gets ejected soon after (~5 sec).

Actually everything is happening in less than 3 sec. the booster ignites before 2 sec mark and so does the cap which first ejects and then is pushed aside by another ignition on it's side. Use VLC player it has a frame by frame analysis button.

negi · Post by **negi** » 28 Jan 2013 23:50

Anujan wrote:Shourya seems to have always been launched from that funny box thing. Not sure if it meant to be a land variant at all. Maybe Agnis take care of land launches.

Yeah even there the dense black smoke from the gas generator was clearly visible.

negi · Post by **negi** » 28 Jan 2013 23:57

Well I think that shroud over the K-15 has something to do with displacing the waterfront to make way for the missile as against protecting the radome (it withstands a lot more during re-entry). The closest I can recollect is Soviet R-39 SLBM.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tn3szml ... C0EAA60C68

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 29 Jan 2013 00:08

HN

Great find. So B05 is like A1 Polaris and single digit accuracy per last test. And more efficient motors.

And INS Arihant with its four tubes with three B-05s is like a Polaris SSBN.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 29 Jan 2013 00:25

beam is 15m, so it should be possible.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 29 Jan 2013 02:23

Is stage separation on NAG class of ATGM missile possible?

I ask this, because it will allow placing the Nag's booster behind the sustainer. This will increase the range/speed, by:
1. Allowing straight exhaust from the booster instead of the oblique ones now
2. The booster can be discarded after the burnout (actually within a second of launch)

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 29 Jan 2013 03:18

is the sustainer ramjet?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 29 Jan 2013 03:19

The control system is aft of the booster. So discarding it will lead to loss of control. So it would need a lot of redesign.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 29 Jan 2013 03:29

nevermind.. it is not.

btw, any chaiwala news on the mmw seeker?

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 29 Jan 2013 03:38

negi wrote:Well I think that shroud over the K-15 has something to do with displacing the waterfront to make way for the missile as against protecting the radome (it withstands a lot more during re-entry). The closest I can recollect is Soviet R-39 SLBM.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/russia/r39.htm

During lift-off special solid-propellant charges create a gas bubble around the missile considerably reducing hydrodynamic resistance. At the moment of launch a special solid-propellant grain, located on the ARSS, create the gas current protection in the form of cavity, which decreases the hydrodynamic loads on the rocket. Command to the starting of first-stage engine will be given at the moment of the output of rocket from the tube. Ignition of the first stage engine occurs after leaving the tube. With start of the first-stage engine after exiting from the water the rocket for the purpose of providing safety of submarine takes away to the side. Starting system in flight is removed by special engines from the rocket and also it takes away to the side.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 29 Jan 2013 04:10

SaiK wrote:
krishnan wrote:what are those 2 platforms , they seems to be very close to the launch
are you hinting at the underwater pontoon and the platform is being dragged at a predetermined speed by the vessel to the left in the pic?

Aren't the "platforms" part of the pontoon itself? Somewhat like a semi-submersible ship or drilling rig platform?

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 29 Jan 2013 04:19

ramana wrote:The control system is aft of the booster. So discarding it will lead to loss of control. So it would need a lot of redesign.

Ramana sir, thank you for replying. I understand that for the first iteration, they want to reuse systems of Nag as much as possible. My question was not for the immediate future.

[youtube]vCp85Y30ybk#![/youtube]
They are redesigning the missile (at 3:20) for future LOBL variants in parallel. Plus they speak about increasing the range (near the end). I think at those ranges, they will no longer need to hide the position of the launch, and hence might do away completely with the booster and my question will be moot.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 29 Jan 2013 05:17

14th Tests ? All those prithvi tests were fake eh ??

Or do we fire multiple missiles around the same time we issue NOTAM?

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 29 Jan 2013 06:14

You see, any of panchabhuta (Prithvi here) element can take the form of any other element, be it Akash, Agni, Vayu, Sagarika... Because every material element is made of a mix of five subtle elements...

It's all acceptable Yindooo symbolism onlee..

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 29 Jan 2013 07:32

I think it was stroke of luck we already had the snorting-bull nosecap system working in brahmos, so reused in Shourya and K15.

Shourya may not strictly need it but probably reused to keep it common.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 29 Jan 2013 07:35

krishnan wrote:what are those 2 platforms , they seems to be very close to the launch

To indicate where cameras should be pointed

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 29 Jan 2013 07:40

wouldn't just 2 floating balloons do the job???

arun · Post by **arun** » 29 Jan 2013 08:32

X Posted.

The efforts of the US to stop India’s acquisition of Submarine Launched Ballistic Missile (SLBM) technology has been thwarted by this last developmental launch of the K-15 aka B05 :

Lilo wrote:A blast from the Past - NYT report on Sagarika in 1998
Russia Is Helping India Extend Range of Missile, U.S. Aides Say

By STEVEN LEE MYERS
WASHINGTON, April 26— Russia is helping India to build a sea-launched ballistic missile that can carry a nuclear warhead and strike deep into Pakistan, say senior Clinton Administration officials, who fear the program will inflame simmering tensions in South Asia.

The assistance has continued for at least three years, the officials said, despite assurances from Russia that its scientists are not contributing restricted technology to India's missile programs.

Vice President Al Gore and other senior Administration officials have appealed to Russian officials to halt the support, with little success. India, which has long had military ties to Russia, has been trying for years to develop more powerful missiles.

Although not tested, the sea-launched missile, the Sagarika, whose name means oceanic in Hindi, is said to have a range of nearly 200 miles and is meant to be launched from submerged submarines.

That would be a technological breakthrough for India in its arms race with Pakistan. American intelligence officials regard the simmering rivalry one of the most dangerous flash points for conventional or even nuclear war. The two countries have fought three wars since independence from Britain in 1947.

India has had an extensive nuclear weapons program since it first tested a nuclear device in 1974.

This month Pakistan tested a medium-range missile that can carry a nuclear weapon that could strike virtually anywhere in India, raising fears of a renewed arms race.

Russia's sale of missiles and missile technology has been one of the more nettlesome obstacles to its improved relations with the United States since the collapse of the Soviet Union.

The New York Times reported on Saturday that Russia did nothing to stop a 22-ton shipment of the type of stainless steel used in making missiles on the way to Iran. The shipment was intercepted by customs officials in Azerbaijan just shy of Iranian territory.

Although the Administration's concerns have focused on Iran over the last year, the help to India offers another instance of Russia's unwillingness or inability to control exports of missile technology and suggests a wider pattern of proliferation, the officials and arms experts said.

''Clearly this cooperation with India raises questions,'' said a senior Administration official who, as with the others, insisted on anonymity because of political sensitivities and to protect American intelligence sources.

The precise nature of Russia's aid is not clear, the officials said. The Administration first approached Russia with its concerns as early as the spring of 1995. At that time, the officials said, Russia acknowledged that scientists from quasipublic research institutes that grew out of the Soviet military-industrial complex were providing technological help for the Sagarika missile.

But the Russians insisted that the assistance was limited and involved only the technology needed to launch a missile from beneath the sea's surface, the officials said.

''We had rather extensive discussions, and the Russians told us that there was some cooperation between Russian entities and the Indians, but that the cooperation was very circumscribed,'' a senior Administration official said.

The Administration received ''certain commitments'' that the Russian role did not involve the missile design and that it ''would continue to be circumscribed,'' the senior Administration official said.

Since then, however, intelligence reports have continued to raise questions about Russia's involvement, the official and others said. Another official who tracked the reports said the help had included ''significant engineering services,'' as well as parts and equipment necessary to build and launch the missile.

The assistance appears to violate the spirit, if not the letter, of the 1993 agreement between Russia and the United States to stop helping India or any other country develop ballistic-missile technology. At that time, Russia canceled a Soviet-era sale of equipment and technology to India that could have been used to build a ballistic missile, and it agreed to adhere to the Missile Technology Control Regime, an agreement among 29 major nations to restrict the spread of missiles.

In exchange, the Clinton Administration agreed to lift sanctions that the Bush Administration had imposed on the Russian and Indian space-research programs, clearing the way for American and Russian cooperation on space programs.

In the State Department, the Pentagon and the Central Intelligence Agency, officials are divided about whether Russia's assistance violates the missile regime, which could prompt sanctions against both Russia and India.

Some officials have concluded that the help with the Sagarika is a clear violation. Others say it slips under the limits of the agreement.

The intelligence reports, the officials said, have also left uncertainties, with some suggesting that the Sagarika is a less sophisticated cruise missile and not a ballistic missile, although either could fall under the regime's restrictions.

A senior Defense Department official said even if Russian help did not necessarily violate the regime, the cooperation has still raised concerns that India is close to mastering technology that would significantly improve its arsenal of missiles, which are now relatively primitive. After that, India could quickly build longer-range missiles.

''The key sensitivity is that the Indians will learn how to launch something from under water -- get it above the water and ignite an engine,'' the official said. ''And then they'll go to the next step after that on their own, something with a longer range.''

Henry D. Sokolski, the executive director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center who was a Pentagon official under President George Bush, said any assistance from Russia to the Sagarika was troubling, even if it did not explicitly violate the agreement's terms.

''Whether it comes up to the edge or over the edge, it's clearly objectionable,'' said Mr. Sokolski, who has criticized the Clinton Administration for not strictly policing proliferation. ''Anything that encourages the Indians to play around with strategic technology is bad business.''

A spokesman at the Russian Embassy in Washington, Mikhail A. Shurgalin, declined to discuss the missile, except to say, ''We fully comply with our commitments under this regime.''

Officials at the Indian Embassy did not respond to telephone inquiries.

India has had a variety of missiles and missile programs, including one to develop a sea-launched ballistic missile. But it has always maintained that the programs are indigenous, and it has not acknowledged the Russian help to the Sagarika.

The Sagarika is being developed in conjunction with fitful efforts by India over the last decade to build a nuclear-powered ballistic submarine, the officials and experts said. A submarine-launched missile would allow India to extend its missile range greatly, theoretically allowing it to strike from around the globe. A submarine-launched missile, because of its mobility and underwater stealth, would also be less vulnerable to attack than land-based missiles.

India's new nationalist Government, led by Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee, announced in March that it would review the country's nuclear policy and consider introducing nuclear weapons to its arsenal. Since then, the new Government has moderated its remarks.

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 29 Jan 2013 08:53

Arun,

That was 15 years ago. A lot of water has passed under the bridge especially after Pokhran-II. There is still denial of key technologies, but it is considerably less today as India is a considerable buyer of armaments on the international scene that US defense contractors want a cut of.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 29 Jan 2013 09:16

do we have list of all the denials?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 29 Jan 2013 09:16

Critical technologies are still off the limits. And what is critical you wont find till you buy it.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 29 Jan 2013 10:09

krishnan wrote:wouldn't just 2 floating balloons do the job???

I guess two floating anythings would do the job so long as they mark the spot. But a second look at the video makes me think both may have had cameras/telemetry. I am sure they would have wanted 1000 frames per sec videos if anything went wrong.

member_20067 · Post by **member_20067** » 29 Jan 2013 10:22

shiv wrote:
krishnan wrote:wouldn't just 2 floating balloons do the job???
I guess two floating anythings would do the job so long as they mark the spot. But a second look at the video makes me think both may have had cameras/telemetry. I am sure they would have wanted 1000 frames per sec videos if anything went wrong.

Is there a deliberate attempt to obscure most of the launch videos with shaky and grainy video... while the real HD videos are kept for internal analysis? Surely it is not a technology or affordability issue to have some high definition videos of these tests?

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 29 Jan 2013 10:31

shiv wrote:
krishnan wrote:wouldn't just 2 floating balloons do the job???
I guess two floating anythings would do the job so long as they mark the spot. But a second look at the video makes me think both may have had cameras/telemetry. I am sure they would have wanted 1000 frames per sec videos if anything went wrong.

Whatever it was, having it so close to the launch shows how much confidence they had...

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 29 Jan 2013 10:49

Basic question- does the Pontoon need to be tethered with cables etc to maintain depth , location, issuing launch code to missile etc and hence the 2 boats.

member_20067 · Post by **member_20067** » 29 Jan 2013 10:59

Aditya_V wrote:Basic question- does the Pontoon need to be tethered with cables etc to maintain depth , location, issuing launch code to missile etc and hence the 2 boats.

yes you can spot the wire roller on one and a big hoist motor on the other... may be I am wrong but that is what I deduce from looking at the pic...

sum · Post by **sum** » 29 Jan 2013 11:26

Submarine missile test a step forward

Even in the visually spectacular field of missile testing, the sight of a submarine-launched missile breaking through the surface is a breathtaking one. Yesterday, Defence Research and Development Organisation ( DRDO) scientists cheered excitedly as their indigenous, submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) leapt out of the water, its rocket motor fired soon after clearing the surface, and it soared off in a white plume to accurately strike a target 700 kilometres away.

To nobodys surprise, the underwater launch went exactly according to plan. This missile, called in turn the K-15, the Shaurya and now the B-05, had already been launched 10 times from under water and thrice from land. This exacting test schedule is designed for assurance, since this is a missile that cannot afford to fail. Until a better one is developed, this will be the backbone of Indias underwater nuclear deterrence.

Going by what the DRDO said about its own test, the B-05 is well up to the task. The missile, developed by DRDO, was launched from a pontoon and was tested for the full range. It met all the mission objectives. The parameters of the vehicle were monitored by radar all through the trajectory and terminal events took place exactly as envisaged, said a ministry of defence release yesterday.

The B-05 is no ordinary ballistic missile. Top DRDO scientists briefed Business Standard that it is not a ballistic missile at all. It could better be characterised as a hypersonic cruise missile, since it remains within the earths atmosphere.

A ballistic missile suffers from inherent disadvantages, since it is a relatively crude device, akin to a stone lobbed upwards, propelled by a rocket. After the rocket burns out, gravity comes into play, pulling the missile warhead down towards the target. Buffeted by wind and re-entry forces, accuracy is a problem; and, since the ballistic missiles path is entirely predictable, shooting it down is relatively easy.

The Shaurya has overcome most of these issues. Its solid-fuel, two-stage rocket accelerates the missile to six times the speed of sound before it reaches an altitude of 40 kilometres (125,000 feet), after which it levels out and cruises towards the target, powered by its onboard fuel. In contrast to conventional ballistic missiles that cannot correct their course midway, the Shaurya is intelligent. Onboard navigation computers kick in near the target, guiding the missile to the target and eliminating errors that inevitably creep in during its turbulent journey.

I would say the Shaurya is a hybrid propulsion missile, says Dr V K Saraswat, the DRDO chief, talking to Business Standard in 2010. Like a ballistic missile, it is powered by solid fuel. And, like a cruise missile, it can guide itself right up to the target.

Making the B-05 even more survivable is its ability to manoeuvre, following a twisting path to the target that makes it very difficult to shoot it down. In contrast, a ballistic missile is predictable; its trajectory gives away its target and its path to it.

The problem with the B-05 remains its relatively short range of just 750 kilometres. While it could reach major cities in most countries if it were launched from just off the coast, that would necessitate a perilous submarine journey to the vicinity of the coastline. Therefore, the DRDO is also developing a longer-range missile, dubbed the K-4, which will have a range of almost 4,000 kilometres. An Indian SSBN armed with the K-4 missile would be able to strike most likely targets from a safe patrol location in the Bay of Bengal.

vina · Post by **vina** » 29 Jan 2013 11:46

Anujan wrote:Shourya seems to have always been launched from that funny box thing. Not sure if it meant to be a land variant at all. Maybe Agnis take care of land launches.

The Shourya is "cold launched". That "funny box thing" will be the gas generator that ejects the missile out , the missile engine ignites only when it clears the tube. Normally that gas generator and entire silo will be underground . Shows you what the exact nature of this Shourya is. It is a strategic missile that is meant to be survivable in a first strike. No one will go to great lengths like cold launch for a tactical missile.

So really, the key parts of a sub launched system, gas generator, ejection and controlling the rise to the surface.. "article clear" as the female voice in the K-15 video says before the male voice says.. "missile visible and out" and the ignition and flight to target, rentry etc are fully proven. From now, it is only a question of scaling as desired. We are over the hump and it is the easy downhill from here.

This is a big ungli /birdie to Unkil for all their years of tech denial and MTCR and other rubbish targeting India. We have just told them to go stuff themselves. We can do it and do it as well as anyone else all alone. Thanks.

nash · Post by **nash** » 29 Jan 2013 12:04

If k-15 is neither BM nor CM, very much like a quasi-BM or hypersonic CM, then what would be the configuration of K-4, which i think the further version of K-15.
Is K-4 will also like k-15 or will it be a pure BM.And if it is like k-15 , then i would say it will be a headache for our rivals.
IMO, it will be the real carrier killer, unlike DF-21.